Balan vs Pattuvakkaran Veetil Sarojini Advocate - MADHUSOODHANAN K — 3000214/2025
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Order XX1 Rule 22. Disposed: Contested--FULL SATISFACTION OF THE DECREE IS RECORDED. on 08th April 2026.
EP - EXECUTION PETITION
CNR: KLKG100003712025
e-Filing Number
01-04-2025
Filing Number
369/2025
Filing Date
04-Apr-2025
Registration No
3000214/2025
Registration Date
04-Apr-2025
Court
Munsiff Court, Hosdurg
Judge
1-Munsiff Judge,hosdurg
Decision Date
08-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--FULL SATISFACTION OF THE DECREE IS RECORDED.
Last updated 29-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Balan
Adv. BALAKRISHAN V
-
2.Leela
Adv. BALAKRISHAN V
-
3.Nandini
Adv. BALAKRISHAN V
-
4.Subhash
Adv. BALAKRISHAN V
-
5.Suma
Adv. BALAKRISHAN V
Respondent(s)
-
1.Pattuvakkaran Veetil Sarojini Advocate - MADHUSOODHANAN K
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
08-Apr-2026
Order
The Munsiff Court of Hosdrug closed Execution Petition No. 214/2025 on April 8, 2026, after recording full satisfaction of the judgment debt. The petitioners (Balan, Leela, and Nandini, along with legal heirs of deceased defendant Kunhikannan) had sought attachment and public auction of movable property to recover dues from respondent Pattuvakkaran Veetil Sarojini, but the matter was resolved when a memo was filed stating full satisfaction had been obtained. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
08-Apr-2026
Disposed
Munsiff Judge,hosdurg
-
23-Mar-2026
For Steps
Munsiff Judge,hosdurg
-
22-Jan-2026
For Enquiry
Munsiff Judge,hosdurg
-
26-Nov-2025
For production of documents/Affidavit
Munsiff Judge,hosdurg
-
08-Aug-2025
For Counter
Munsiff Judge,hosdurg
-
01-Jul-2025
Issue notice to respondent. For return of Notice.
Munsiff Judge,hosdurg
-
29-May-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
04-Apr-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 3000214/2025
The Munsiff Court of Hosdrug closed Execution Petition No. 214/2025 on April 8, 2026, after recording full satisfaction of the judgment debt. The petitioners (Balan, Leela, and Nandini, along with legal heirs of deceased defendant Kunhikannan) had sought attachment and public auction of movable property to recover dues from respondent Pattuvakkaran Veetil Sarojini, but the matter was resolved when a memo was filed stating full satisfaction had been obtained. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts